Here we have all the bickering about a split national champion, yet no real result as to how to fix it. Fact is if you look at who usc beat this year, where their opponents were ranked *overall not many were*, then compare that to LSU and Oklahoma you'd see why I agree with the sugar bowl having the right teams this season. Here's my thoughts.

1)Have the powerhouses acc, big 12, big east, big ten, pac 10, sec ALL have a conference title game like the big 12 and sec. If you don't win your conference let alone the title, how can you play for the national title?

Aside of that aspect of it, another thing I hate is the # of teams from a conference allowed auto. bids. Teams like air force, uconn and n.illinois were snubbed this year.

I say allow 3 auto bids per conference including your conference champion *so there's 4* and allow the mid-majors some spots. There's no reason teams 6-6 like ucla, kansas and n'western among a few others should've been allowed in a bowl game this year. 6-6 is mediocre and most of the avg. clubs scheduled hardcore cream puffs or div. II schools for non-conference games.

I think they need to take a-little more consideration into strength of schedule instead of how much you beat a team by.

Also Maybe have some of the competative small schools be able to face some top teams you could say that for all the small schools. Or possibly put some of them in good conferences to compete. also need to go by the BCS rankings. Texas was ranked 5# in the BCS ranking system but didn't get to go to go to a top BCS game like they deserved to with the ranking they had.

the best way to fix it is to make everyone equal.....by that, i mean they should either all have a championship game, or no conference should have a championship game.....

however, college basketball is the same way.....they are all determined differently as well.....and every year, there are two teams that win the basketball national championshsip, but no one talks about that.....because the NIT doesn't mean as much.....

i have no problem with the fact that there was a split title this year.....i think the BCS champion is the "real" champion and the AP champ is just an opinion.....no further games are needed to determine one final winner, nothing like that.....in the past two decades, there have been four split national champions.....think any of those schools display a banner that says "1991 split national champion"?.....no, they display a banner that says "1991 National Champion"......

college football, with its fans, the atmosphere, the experience, the bowl games......that is what makes it so great.....a playoff?.....what would that do to improve the game?.....

then, you could have a three loss team upset an undefeated team in the first round and continue on, while the one loss team goes home.....who wants to see that?.....

in basketball, you don't have to win your conference to get in.....Syracuse didn't win the Big East last year, but they won the title......so, i say no playoffs and if anything were to change, just go back to the way it was before the BCS.....

They should just have larger conferences with like 16 teams in a division, and they should only play against each other. Their doesn't need to be a million bowl games. It's ridiculous. They only play the top two teams in each division for their own championship. Having a National Champion in any amatuer sport is a joke and is always going to be unfair to plenty of ppl. There are too many teams and the whole process is a convoluted mess.

Course, I don't really follow college sports and could really care less about what they do or don't do, so don't pay any attention to me.

__________________Click to subscribe to the podcast feed or Download Episode 33 and give your feedback in the KPWF room.

I happen to love watching 29 bowl games. It's a chance to see the mid major conferences get a chance to play the majors and show that they can compete, and it's nice to see sec vs big 12 or big ten vs acc when you normally don't get that in the ncaa football ranks.

I mean if you scheudle 3 cream puff teams to beat, and then win your division and have only one loss, but out of 8 conference games, 6 of the teams you beat had an under .500 winning % then why should you be considered more deserving of a national title game when you basically played no winning teams?